Aims. Distraction osteogenesis with intramedullary lengthening devices has undergone rapid development in the past decade with implant enhancement. In this first single-centre matched-pair analysis we focus on the comparison of treatment with the
Aims. The
Aims. Patients undergoing femoral lengthening by external fixation
tolerate treatment less well when compared to tibial lengthening.
Lengthening of the femur with an intramedullary device may have
advantages. Patients and Methods. We reviewed all cases of simple femoral lengthening performed
at our unit from 2009 to 2014. Cases of nonunions, concurrent deformities,
congenital limb deficiencies and lengthening with an unstable hip
were excluded, leaving 33 cases (in 22 patients; 11 patients had
bilateral procedures) for review. Healing index, implant tolerance
and complications were compared. Results. In 20 cases (15 patients) the
Aims. Limb-lengthening nails have largely replaced external fixation in limb-lengthening and reconstructive surgery. However, the adverse events and high prevalence of radiological changes recently noted with the STRYDE lengthening nail have raised concerns about the use of internal lengthening nails. The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of radiological bone abnormalities between STRYDE,
Aims. The STRYDE nail is an evolution of the
As an alternative to external fixators, intramedullary lengthening nails (ILNs) can be employed for distraction osteogenesis. While previous studies have demonstrated that typical complications of external devices, such as soft-tissue tethering, and pin site infection can be avoided with ILNs, there is a lack of studies that exclusively investigated tibial distraction osteogenesis with motorized ILNs inserted via an antegrade approach. A total of 58 patients (median age 17 years (interquartile range (IQR) 15 to 21)) treated by unilateral tibial distraction osteogenesis for a median leg length discrepancy of 41 mm (IQR 34 to 53), and nine patients with disproportionate short stature treated by bilateral simultaneous tibial distraction osteogenesis, with magnetically controlled motorized ILNs inserted via an antegrade approach, were retrospectively analyzed. The median follow-up was 37 months (IQR 30 to 51). Outcome measurements were accuracy, precision, reliability, bone healing, complications, and patient-reported outcome assessed by the Limb Deformity-Scoliosis Research Society Score (LD-SRS-30).Aims
Methods
The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess and investigate the safety and efficacy of using a distal tibial osteotomy compared to proximal osteotomy for limb lengthening in children. In this study, there were 59 consecutive tibial lengthening and deformity corrections in 57 children using a circular frame. All were performed or supervised by the senior author between January 2013 and June 2019. A total of 25 who underwent a distal tibial osteotomy were analyzed and compared to a group of 34 who had a standard proximal tibial osteotomy. For each patient, the primary diagnosis, time in frame, complications, and lengthening achieved were recorded. From these data, the frame index was calculated (days/cm) and analyzed.Aims
Methods
Double-level lengthening, bone transport, and bifocal compression-distraction are commonly undertaken using Ilizarov or other fixators. We performed double-level fixator-assisted nailing, mainly for the correction of deformity and lengthening in the same segment, using a straight intramedullary nail to reduce the time in a fixator. A total of 23 patients underwent this surgery, involving 27 segments (23 femora and four tibiae), over a period of ten years. The most common indication was polio in ten segments and rickets in eight; 20 nails were inserted retrograde and seven antegrade. A total of 15 lengthenings were performed in 11 femora and four tibiae, and 12 double-level corrections of deformity without lengthening were performed in the femur. The mean follow-up was 4.9 years (1.1 to 11.4). Four patients with polio had tibial lengthening with arthrodesis of the ankle. We compared the length of time in a fixator and the external fixation index (EFI) with a control group of 27 patients (27 segments) who had double-level procedures with external fixation. The groups were matched for the gain in length, age, and level of difficulty score.Aims
Patients and Methods